Council set to weigh in on if it's time for action on anti-discrimination body

A coalition of community activist groups is asking Charlottesville officials to act immediately to create an anti-discrimination commission in the city, but City Hall remains on the fence over whether a new agency is necessary.

City Manager Maurice Jones has recommended that the city set up a task force to study the proposed human rights commission for another year in order to make a more informed decision, but commission backers have rejected Jones’s suggestion as an unnecessary delay that could kill the project.

Several city councilors have expressed support for the commission in some form, but, on Monday, they’ll have to decide what’s going to happen next.

“Waiting another year is a common political stall tactic by the city,” said M. Rick Turner, president of the Albemarle-Charlottesville NAACP, which is backing the commission. “… They’re hoping that people will either forget or they’ll become less interested.”

In a memo prepared for the City Council, Jones suggested setting up an 11-member task force that would deliver a recommendation in February of 2013. During the coming year, the human rights task force would collaborate with community groups dealing with discrimination, hold public forums and hear complaints, but would carry no investigative or enforcement authority.

“The recommendation is hardly a stall tactic,” Jones responded in an email. “It keeps this important issue moving forward and allows the city government to engage in a meaningful discussion with our residents and businesses about discrimination and race relations in our city. And, hopefully, it will give us a true understanding of the extent of the problem. That hasn’t been established just yet. If the study group recommends we need a commission with strong enforcement and investigative authority, I’m confident the city government will respond accordingly.”

The proposed Charlottesville Commission on Human Rights, Diversity and Race Relations, estimated to cost $300,000 its first year and $200,000 each year after that, would be tasked with investigating complaints of discrimination and taking action to resolve them. It would also take on the outreach and education efforts of the Dialogue on Race, a city initiative launched in 2009 to foster better race relations.

Supporters have characterized the commission as a major institutional shift that would prove the city’s dedication to change, while skeptics have characterized it as a politically appointed, agenda-driven agency that may not be the best approach to combating discrimination.

The commission was proposed about two months ago by the Dialogue on Race’s Government Work Group, and it has been endorsed by the Dialogue on Race Steering Committee. The work group spent roughly a year working with local groups to determine the need for a commission. The effort was headed up by Walter F. Heinecke, an associate professor at the University of Virginia’s Curry School of Education.

Heinecke said there’s no need to spend another year studying the need for such a commission, because the work group has already put in that time and effort, and concluded that it’s needed.

“The time isn’t ripe to say ‘one more year’ and delay justice,” Heinecke said, adding that the work group was in regular consultation with city officials throughout the process. “This shouldn’t be any kind of a surprise to people. I think it’s a matter of political will.”

The commission is also backed by the Legal Aid Justice Center, Public Housing Association of Residents, the Quality Community Council and Virginia Organizing, according to a news release Heinecke sent out last week.

Heinecke, the proposal’s main author and champion, has narrowed the scope of his idea by deciding to leave out the stronger enforcement powers included in the original proposal.

He had originally pushed for a more robust commission that combined aspects of a number of different commissions around the state, but he tweaked the idea to avoid having to first seek enabling legislation from Richmond.

Heinecke specifically pointed to the commission’s ability to punish offenders with fines of up to $5,000, a power that was included in the original proposal, saying it’s no longer a part of the discussion.

“We felt it more prudent to begin with a commission that is currently enabled by state law, rather than waiting to first try to change state law,” Heinecke said in a recent email.

Heinecke is now pushing for the local commission to be modeled after the Prince William County Human Rights Commission.

“The [Prince William] model needs no further state authorization as it is based on and enabled by the Virginia Human Rights Act and does not allow for the levying of additional fines or remedies beyond those allowed by the [U.S. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission],” Heinecke said.

Jones said his suggestion for further study simply retraces the steps Prince William took in the early stages of its commission.

“Let’s remember the model that has been proposed by the action group is based on Prince William County’s approach. They decided to involve a large segment of their community in the debate before recommending their commission,” Jones said. “We’re simply proposing to do the same thing here.”

The Prince William commission has investigative and enforcement powers and provides outreach, education and research related to race relations and discrimination. The commission is authorized to seek subpoenas for non-compliance with an investigation. The commission is also enabled to deal with discrimination complaints leveled against government employees.

One of those voicing public skepticism of a human rights commission in Charlottesville is Timothy Hulbert, president of the Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce. Though the chamber has not officially weighed in, Hulbert said he’s heard plenty of concern and fear that the commission amounts to a “politically appointed tribunal.”

“You would think over the last year I would have more contact with our members about water … or about roads, but this issue has really energized a whole number of our members with concerns about the direction,” Hulbert said. “… We’re listening to our members and talking to the city, and trying to figure out how’s the best way to go about achieving the goal. We certainly share the goal: eliminating discrimination.”

Hulbert said he doesn’t understand the argument that such a commission would help businesses by simply finding facts, because there’s a “presumption of guilt as opposed to innocence.”

“So you defend yourself … That’s the problem. You’ve got businesses playing defense. You want businesses being successful,” Hulbert said. “It’s relatively simple. If you’ve been discriminated against, there are lots of mechanisms in place to get justice.”

Turner said the business community is trying to protect its interests.

“Their interest is to continue things like they’ve always been, to continue the politics of exclusion and for the city to continue the old boys’ network,” Turner said.

Last week, the chamber announced the establishment of its Minority Business Council, an idea that also grew out of the Dialogue on Race, but Hulbert said the timing was unconnected to the human rights commission proposal. The council is intended to boost minority-owned businesses in Charlottesville and surrounding areas.

“In light of the city’s budgetary constraints and the need for further clarification and study, I understand the recommendation for deferred action,” said Gertrude A. Ivory, co-chair of the Dialogue on Race. “It is a responsible response that acknowledges the concerns expressed by the proponents of the proposal.

Turner said he’s optimistic that the councilors who have expressed support for the commission will “be forthright” at the meeting Monday night.

“I think the Dialogue on Race for the most part has done their job. We’ve done enough talking,” Turner said. “Now we got to go into some action in terms of protecting the citizens of Charlottesville.”